Main Area and Open Discussion > Living Room
Silk Road Seized - Dread Pirate Roberts Arrested
Renegade:
Ross' lawyer is arguing 4th amendment violations:
http://www.wired.com/2014/08/feds-silk-road-investigation-violated-privacy-law-sites-alleged-creator-tells-court/
In a pre-trial motion filed in the case late Friday night, Ulbricht’s lawyers laid out a series of arguments to dismiss all charges in the case based on Ulbricht’s fourth amendment protections against warrantless searches of his digital property. As early as the FBI’s initial discovery of servers in Iceland hosting the site on the Tor anonymity network—seemingly without obtaining a search warrant from a judge—Ulbricht argues that law enforcement violated his constitutional right to privacy, tainting all further evidence against him dug up in the investigation that followed.
--- End quote ---
Renegade:
And Coindesk on the issue:
http://www.coindesk.com/ross-ulbrichts-silk-road-defence-invokes-fourth-amendment/
Ross Ulbricht’s defence team has filed a new pre-trial motion calling on the court to dismiss charges in the Silk Road case on the grounds of Fourth Amendment privacy protections.
--- End quote ---
It will be interesting to see how the judge tries to wiggle out of that.
40hz:
It will be interesting to see how the judge tries to wiggle out of that.
-Renegade (August 05, 2014, 10:36 AM)
--- End quote ---
Judges don't wriggle. They issue rulings. And when in doubt, they rule as they deem best and let the higher courts deal with any technical (Court of Appeals) or larger constitutional (SCOTUS) issues if they come up. Many times those higher courts decline to rule on (CoA) or even hear (SCOTUS) the case. More often than not, the ruling of the lower court is affirmed on appeal anyway. On those fairly rare occasions when a lower court is overruled by a higher court, it generally only results in the case being sent back to the lower court for a new trial. It's not a "get out of jail free" card. The circuit courts conduct trials. The CoA and SCOTUS don't try cases. Or dismiss them. They serve more as the US legal system's quality control department.
So barring Ulbricht's motion coming before an extremely sympathetic judge, it will most likely be dismissed with little comment. (Yes, US judges can do that.)
Despite what you see on TV shows, most US judges are extremely loathe to dismiss serious charges (especially when subsequent corroborating evidence backs up the substance of the charges made) on purely technical grounds. At least for anything other than a case where the strong chance of capital punishment is on the menu.
Renegade:
So barring Ulbricht's motion coming before an extremely sympathetic judge, it will most likely be dismissed with little comment. (Yes, US judges can do that.)
-40hz (August 05, 2014, 02:01 PM)
--- End quote ---
You think his 4th amendment argument will work?
40hz:
So barring Ulbricht's motion coming before an extremely sympathetic judge, it will most likely be dismissed with little comment. (Yes, US judges can do that.)
-40hz (August 05, 2014, 02:01 PM)
--- End quote ---
You think his 4th amendment argument will work?
-Renegade (August 05, 2014, 07:56 PM)
--- End quote ---
Not really. Maybe for some of the evidence. But that's a long shot. And certainly not for all the evidence.
But I'm not an attorney - so who knows?
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version